For international readers this is a letter to Stephen Harper the Prime Minister of Canada. He recently took a group of over 200 guests with him to accept an honourary degree and attend the dedication of a bird sanctuary. Much has been written about Harper’s strong support of Israel.For Canadian readers, this is not meant to be an academic paper.

Dear Prime Minister Harper,

I want to really thank you. You have managed to get the topic of Palestine and Israel in front of the Canadian public. I guess we are all pretty clear on what you believe. I suppose I appreciate that.

I’m not sure if you have been as surprized as I have to the Canadian public’s general reaction. I know they loved you in Israel. I suspect on the way back in the plane everyone told you what a great trip it was. So, I kind of hate to tell you this but your trip didn’t go over quite so well at home. I am not sure if you realize that -or if you wonder why -or if you even care. I guess you probably believe most Canadians won’t change their vote because of this one issue. You may be right about that.

The make-up of Stephen Harper’s 250-strong entourage that accompanied him to the Middle East was a closely guarded secret until just days before the delegation touched down in Israel. Now we know why: the list of eager travellers, many who went at the taxpayer’s expense, includes right-wing Christian extremists whose beliefs are blatantly at odds not only with official government policy, but with the sensibilities of most Canadians.

Evangelical Christians make up about 10% of the Canadian population and around 18% of the 22 million Canadians who still identify with the Christian faith, according to the latest Statistics Canada data. But of the dozen or so church representatives invited on the delegation, only one was not an evangelical—and that was National Post columnist Fr. Raymond de Souza, a Catholic priest known for his pro-Israel views, and a board member of the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

Clearly there was one criterion for being a member of the Christian portion of the delegation: unmitigated fervour for the state of Israel. There was not a single representative who could speak with any integrity about the plight and aspirations of Palestinian Christians. Anglicans, Catholics, United Church, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Mennonites, Quakers and others who have long historical relationships with the Christian community in Palestine were shunned in favour of the Christian and Missionary Alliance of Canada, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Fellowship of Evangelical Baptist Churches in Canada, Trinity Bible Church, Crossroads Christian Communications, International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, and the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. (See list of the PM's party.)

I find it disturbing to hear the Prime Minister of Canada linking anti-semitism to those taking action against Israeli Government policy. Yesterday in the Knesset he said that "criticism of Israeli government policy is not in and of itself necessarily anti semitic", but then he goes on to contradict, what he has just said by saying "but what else can we call criticism that selectively condemns only the Jewish State . . . What else can we call it when Israel is routinely singled out, targeted at the United Nations . . . any judgement of Israeli actions must start with this understanding." He summarized that "understanding" as follows: "This is the face of the new anti semitism, it targets the Jewish people by targeting Israel and attempts to make the old bigotry acceptable to a new generation."

What is he doing here - if it isn't an accusation of practicing discrimination based solely on race/religion by both the UN and those that oppose Israeli government policies? I know that in the case of the United Church, this is a falsehood. Decisions made by the United Church to boycott Israeli products manufactured in occupied territory were made because of Israeli government policy that deliberately enable race based discrimination with devastating consequences - I believe that you can call that "apartheid". How would the UN have any credibility if it based it's actions on race based discrimination?

Is Harper deliberately twisting the truth and muddying the waters with false accusations of anti-semitism (- mechanisms that destroy democracy)? If we don’t expose these warped lies for what they are, they will continue to fuel something that festers into the murky climate that allows dictatorial monsters to rise to power.

I am shocked by these words from a Canadian Prime Minister. This country needs a spotlight on what is happening here. Perhaps the negative reactions and outrage of those from overseas might open our eyes to what is occurring here.

Harper's use of words was stunning, particularly his claim that support of Israel was a "moral imperative". Since when does a "moral imperative" lie with an oppressor -- currently involved in crimes against humanity in the forms of apartheid and genocidal treatment -- rather than with the oppressed? Harper's support of Israel is literally criminal, according to Article 3 of the Convention against Apartheid.

Silence is complicity; those who object to Harper's adulation of this criminality have the moral imperative to speak out.

Categories

The United Network for Justice and Peace in Palestine and Israel may make available certain information provided by third parties related to the circumstances in Palestine and Israel. Information is provided for educational purposes. Any opinions expressed in the material is that of the source and not necessarily that of the network.